Institut for Biologi

Aarhus University Seal / Aarhus Universitets segl

J.-C. Svenning

Areas of global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

DOI

  • Martin Jung, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg
  • ,
  • Andy Arnell, WCMC
  • ,
  • Xavier de Lamo, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  • ,
  • Shaenandhoa García-Rangel, WCMC
  • ,
  • Matthew Lewis, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, University of Cambridge
  • ,
  • Jennifer Mark, WCMC
  • ,
  • Cory Merow, University of Connecticut
  • ,
  • Lera Miles, WCMC
  • ,
  • Ian Ondo, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
  • ,
  • Samuel Pironon, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
  • ,
  • Corinna Ravilious, WCMC
  • ,
  • Malin Rivers, Botanic Gardens Conservation International
  • ,
  • Dmitry Schepashenko, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Siberian Federal University
  • ,
  • Oliver Tallowin, WCMC
  • ,
  • Arnout van Soesbergen, WCMC
  • ,
  • Rafaël Govaerts, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
  • ,
  • Bradley L. Boyle, University of Arizona
  • ,
  • Brian J. Enquist, University of Arizona
  • ,
  • Xiao Feng, Florida State University
  • ,
  • Rachael Gallagher, Macquarie University
  • ,
  • Brian Maitner, University of Arizona
  • ,
  • Shai Meiri, Tel Aviv University
  • ,
  • Mark Mulligan, King's College London
  • ,
  • Gali Ofer, Tel Aviv University
  • ,
  • Uri Roll, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
  • ,
  • Jeffrey O. Hanson, University of Porto
  • ,
  • Walter Jetz, Yale University
  • ,
  • Moreno Di Marco, University of Rome La Sapienza
  • ,
  • Jennifer McGowan, The Nature Conservancy
  • ,
  • D. Scott Rinnan, Yale University
  • ,
  • Jeffrey D. Sachs, Columbia University
  • ,
  • Myroslava Lesiv, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg
  • ,
  • Vanessa M. Adams, University of Tasmania
  • ,
  • Samuel C. Andrew, CSIRO
  • ,
  • Joseph R. Burger, University of Kentucky
  • ,
  • Lee Hannah, Conservation International
  • ,
  • Pablo A. Marquet, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile, Universidad de Chile, Santa Fe Institute, Instituto de Sistemas Complejos de Valparaíso (ISCV)
  • ,
  • James K. McCarthy, Landcare Research
  • ,
  • Naia Morueta-Holme, Københavns Universitet
  • ,
  • Erica A. Newman, University of Arizona
  • ,
  • Daniel S. Park, Purdue University
  • ,
  • Patrick R. Roehrdanz, Conservation International
  • ,
  • Jens Christian Svenning
  • Cyrille Violle, Universite de Montpellier
  • ,
  • Jan J. Wieringa, Naturalis National Museum of Natural History
  • ,
  • Graham Wynne, World Resources Institute
  • ,
  • Steffen Fritz, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg
  • ,
  • Bernardo B.N. Strassburg, Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Rio de Janeiro, International Institute for Sustainability, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Botanical Garden Research Institute of Rio de Janeiro
  • ,
  • Michael Obersteiner, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Oxford University Centre for the Environment
  • ,
  • Valerie Kapos, WCMC
  • ,
  • Neil Burgess, WCMC
  • ,
  • Guido Schmidt-Traub, UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network
  • ,
  • Piero Visconti, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg

To meet the ambitious objectives of biodiversity and climate conventions, the international community requires clarity on how these objectives can be operationalized spatially and how multiple targets can be pursued concurrently. To support goal setting and the implementation of international strategies and action plans, spatial guidance is needed to identify which land areas have the potential to generate the greatest synergies between conserving biodiversity and nature’s contributions to people. Here we present results from a joint optimization that minimizes the number of threatened species, maximizes carbon retention and water quality regulation, and ranks terrestrial conservation priorities globally. We found that selecting the top-ranked 30% and 50% of terrestrial land area would conserve respectively 60.7% and 85.3% of the estimated total carbon stock and 66% and 89.8% of all clean water, in addition to meeting conservation targets for 57.9% and 79% of all species considered. Our data and prioritization further suggest that adequately conserving all species considered (vertebrates and plants) would require giving conservation attention to ~70% of the terrestrial land surface. If priority was given to biodiversity only, managing 30% of optimally located land area for conservation may be sufficient to meet conservation targets for 81.3% of the terrestrial plant and vertebrate species considered. Our results provide a global assessment of where land could be optimally managed for conservation. We discuss how such a spatial prioritization framework can support the implementation of the biodiversity and climate conventions.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftNature Ecology & Evolution
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 23 aug. 2021

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater

ID: 222459430